My previous, recent "Paradigm unshifted" essay in full

In many essays over the past year or two, I've written about a "paradigm shift" for the Anti-Islam Movement (not to mention that, in certain important respects, there is no Anti-Islam Movement per se) -- namely, that it undergo the transition from being merely anti-Islam to being also anti-Muslim.

Almost as important as the cultivation of an informed suspicion of Muslims (which is what "anti-Muslim" would entail) is the recognition that goes along with this: Namely, that the broader Western mainstream, whose myopia about the problem of Islam remains the single most important hindrance to the future safety if not survival of the West, is not primarily anxious to defend Islam, but rather to defend Muslims.  Hence, if the Counter-Jihad is to make any headway with the broader Western Mainstream which is still steering our societies, we must understand where they're coming from.  But the Counter-Jihad Mainstream persists in its old paradigm, clinging tenaciously to an "Islam only" strategy.

Thus, as I have argued a few times on my blog here, the two Mainstreams -- the broader Western mainstream and the Counter-Jihad Mainstream -- are talking at cross purposes, talking past each other on this most exigent issue.

As all the above-linked essays go into detail on what I mean by this, and it would be rather laborious to re-explain it all, I invite the reader to read at least a couple of those essays to get a better sense of my argument.

This is all to introduce a recent essay by Baron Bodissey on the Gates of Vienna blog on this very theme.  Recently, I've written three essays in relative praise of his analyses (one two-part essay, A sunbreak of sense "in the counter-jihad"; and Real Problemerism pierces through to the two Mainstreams).  But, alas, here I must upbraid him for his failure to paradigm-shift.

After noting that the propaganda term "Islamophobia" has shown signs of weakening in its effectiveness for the PC MC Mainstream (and for the Leftists and Muslims who ride its coattails), Baron conjectures a new strategy on their part:

Now it seems that the Islamophiles are regrouping their forces for a new assault.

And how does their regrouping manifest itself?  Baron adduces the answer to that that from a recent definition of "Islamophobia" by the OSCE (a major bureaucratic tangent of the EU, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe), which he reasonably assumes is a careful recalibration of the term in order to strengthen it from recent criticisms:

“Islamophobia is a certain perception of Muslims, which may be expressed as hatred toward Muslims. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of Islamophobia are directed toward Muslim or non-Muslim individuals and/or their property, toward Muslim community institutions and religious facilities”

Baron astutely noticed that this definition of Islamophobia doesn't mention "Islam" once.   However, he failed to understand why.  I quote him now (without italicization or quotation marks, to preserve both of those in his quote):

Quote: 

When time permits, I’ll write more about this confection of vague, nebulous descriptors, but for the moment I’ll just state the bleedin’ obvious: this isn’t a definition of Islamophobia, it’s a definition of Muslimophobia. Islam is not involved at all. The words “Islam” and “Islamic” do not appear in the text. To paraphrase Monty Python, it’s certainly uncontaminated by “Islam”.

The wording of this definition deals entirely with the fear or hatred of Muslims, and nothing else. Therefore the definition is inaccurate, incoherent, and inappropriate as a gloss on “Islamophobia”.

End quote.

Sure, on one level, Baron is technically correct. But he's failing to see why this PC MC definition of Islamophobia concentrates on Muslims.  As I mentioned above, he seems oblivious to the fact that the main reason the broader Western mainstream is so intent on protecting Islam, is because they anxiously worry that the growing criticism of Islam throughout the West (still relatively glacial and minuscule, but nevertheless growing) portends horrible consequences for all the Muslims (doubtlessly the vast majority) whom they deem to be innocent.

And on this point, as I have argued in previous essays, the broader Western mainstream is being somewhat more logical than the Counter-Jihad Mainstream; while the latter is either being disingenuous in pretending they can't see the joined-at-the-hip connection between Islam and Muslims, or they're being obtuse in maintaining this denial.

Secondly, Baron apparently is incognizant of the fact that Islam is only a problem when it's put into practice; and it cannot be put into practice without...  Muslims.  Or if he is cognizant of this fact, he is strangely ignoring its central relevance on this topic.

As I said above, in previous essays (linked in the first two links way above) I've argued in exhausting detail the fine points of this problem of the problem of the problem (the problem3 of the Counter-Jihad Mainstream oblivious to the problem2 of the broader Western Mainstream mainly concerned about the welfare of Muslims threatened by a portentous white Western "backlash"-cum-Another-Holocaust while effectively ignoring (when not indirectly aiding and abetting) the actual problem1 of Muslims putting their Islam into practice).

It seems reasonable to infer that those in the Counter-Jihad Mainstream (including both the majority of Civilians in the  movement and the Leadership) who continue to focus almost exclusively on the problem of Islam and not Muslims, are doing so for a combination of two reasons:

1) latent reflexes of PC MC in their nervous system (so to speak), and

2) an anxiety to please the broader Western Mainstream.

"Look, Western Mainstream, we don't hate Muslims, we're only objecting to the ideology of Islam!  See!!?? We're not really haters of Muslims!  Please let us in to your dinner party so we can talk!  It's getting cold out here...!!!". Sort of the CJM version of virtue-signalling.

Baron goes on to say:

Any definition of “Islamophobia” that fails to mention the ideological aspect does not even begin to engage the issue.

Well, sure.  But any opposition to the PC MC Mainstream on this issue that fails to delve into the inextricably corollary problem of Muslims -- How many Muslims represent the pragmatic problem of Islam? How do we know how many there are? Which Muslims are problematic and which ones aren't? How do we tell the difference? Are any of the problematic Muslims "reformable"? If yes, how so? If not, why not?  -- also "does not even begin to engage the issue".

For the issue is not merely Islam (the primary problem), but also what Islam means to the broader Western Mainstream (the secondary problem), whose sociopolitical dominance ensures that the problem of Islam won't be adequately dealt with until that broader Western Mainstream begins to wake up to it.  If the Counter-Jihad has any function, it is to try to wake up its own West.  It won't be able to do this effectively, if it keeps talking past the broad consensus on the problem.  This then generates the tertiary problem of the problem of the problem.  The Counter-Jihad Mainstream seems to have stuck its gears in the mud on this for years, if it hasn't even positively regressed.

P.S.:

The first commenter on Baron's essay, one "Michael", quotes from the paper in which the "Islamophobia" definition was issued:

Paragraph 34. “In this respect, it is not Islamophobic to not uphold or agree with the religious beliefs and practices of Muslims. Nor is it Islamophobic to condemn atrocities or similar when committed by a group or individuals who are identified as Muslim or who claim to be acting in ‘the name of Islam’ as indeed some do. It is however likely to be Islamophobic if those criticisms, disagreements or condemnations are used as to demonise or vilify all Muslims without differentiation.”

No doubt, most Counter-Jihad Mainstreamers would quiver and bristle at that A word "all Muslims" and protest that no, they don't demonize or vilify all Muslims!  Apparently they can't see that the question, and the ball, goes back to their court.  If they agree with the Western Mainstream that the problem is not "all Muslims", how do they disagree about Muslims putting Islam into practice?  Is the answer simply that the  Counter-Jihad Mainstream believes that the number of Muslims who are problematic is higher?  Is that all that's keeping the two Mainstreams from coming to the table and talking maturely about this most exigent problem? I doubt it. 

What's keeping them from meeting in the middle on this horrendous problem is the fact that Islam's problem by its very nature generates a problem of Muslims so alarmingly systemic and metastatic, one cannot conveniently compartmentalize the two problems from each other (let alone concentrate only on the former, while neglecting the latter in its fullness).  This fact triggers an open-ended anxiety among the PC MCs, and among the Counter-Jihad Mainstreamers who still have latent resides of PC MC in their hearts & minds -- an anxiety that makes them think that if they continue learning more about Islam and continue connecting the dots (and with that, continue palpating the "connective tissue", as Frank Gaffney calls it, between the myriad dots), they will be unable to control their Inner White Western Hitler which lurks inside all Westerners, ready to round up some new ethnic minority and genocide its millions of innocent members.  So, to prevent that horrible conclusion from unfolding, we must not think the thoughts that might lead us there.

This denial and self-censorship is, of course, much stronger in the PC MCs of the broader Western Mainstream; but in a curious way, it exerts as much, if not more, of a hold on the Counter-Jihad Mainstreamers, if only because they have an otherwise more open mind about learning more and more the hideous warts of Islam.  It can be a powerful psychological dynamic, I think, when something that ordinarily would trigger the mechanism of denial in a person becomes, for a variety of reasons, less easy to deny (including that person's increasing willingness to not flinch in the face of the darker side of that something he would prefer to deny).

This then sets into motion a tension between these two opposing psychological forces: Should I continue to become more and more appalled by the nature of Islam and its concrete realization as actualized by Muslims around the world, such that I logically conclude  that all Muslims are suspect (since part of that nature of Islam I've been learning includes the devastating factors of taqiyya and the blueprint for ultimate conquest)?

Or -- Should I recoil from those logical consequences, and should I take two steps back after having joined this tiny, straggling group of souls around the world who over the years since 911 have painstakingly taken a giant leap for Mankind, and should I find some kind of incoherent comfort in being oh-so robustly "anti-Islam" while pretending like this doesn't have to mean I'm also anti-Muslim?

Apparently, most in the Counter-Jihad Mainstream have opted for Door #2 because of the beguiling hand model gesturing in pantomime what Don Pardo describes will be the reward for such a choice: A free washer-dryer set, a free trip to the Turks & Caicos islands, and you may nevermore be called a "hater", a "bigot", a "racist", an "Islamophobe", or a "Nazi"! (Even though Monte Hall lied about that last promise, the CJM members of the audience continue to swoon for Door #2.)

Not to mention that, apparently, they have allowed the PC MC Mainstream to set the terms of the debate -- that to become anti-Muslim automatically and inexorably leads to wanting to genocide Muslims!  This inability to disagree with the PC MC Mainstream on this, and to articulate firmly how and why an unforgiving criticism of Muslims following their Islam is not in fact a necessary prelude to a genocide of Muslims (on the contrary, the latter would be a horrible moral sin), demonstrates a pathetic infirmity in the Counter-Jihad.  Even worse, no one in the Counter-Jihad Mainstream wants to even talk about this, or even seems aware of this at all...